The facts are that for the last decade LucasArts had a poor performance, but under Lucas, LucasArts was part of a privately held company and as such Lucas didn't have to answer to anyone. Disney is a publicly traded company and has a responsibility to its stockholders. Retaining a division that could be detrimental to a publicly traded company is irresponsible management because it decreases the worth of the company.

You may not like the system, but that's the way it works. As someone who's retirement was hit very hard in 2008, I appreciate responsible management.

If LA had a poor performance, then why did Disney purchase the company? Are bad investments responsible management and good for the share holders?_________________The absurd man thus catches sight of a burning and frigid, transparent and limited universe in which nothing is possible but everything is given, and beyond which all is collapse and nothingness. He can then decide to accept such a universe and draw from it his strength, his refusal to hope, and the unyielding evidence of a life without consolation.

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:43 am

Message

WerehunterKnight

Joined: 08 Apr 2011Posts: 362

I wouldn't say it was a bad investment. While Lucas Arts was under performing, other aspects of the purchase was enough to counter it. Not to mention the money that can be made by licensing out the trademarks. But keeping Lucas Arts open, would have been a bad investment.

Though I am surprised they didn't at least try to turn it around themselves.

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:13 am

Message

GrandMasterMaster

Joined: 26 Aug 2011Posts: 575Location: Earth Jedi Temple

And Disney got ILM too, meaning they are connected to just about every movie in Hollywood that needs special effects - it was a very good investment._________________"But it was so artistically done."

“No. I am Ganner. This threshold is mine. I claim it for my own. Bring on your thousands, one at a time or all in a rush. I don’t give a damn. None shall pass.”

"Shaken, not stirred, will get you cold water with a dash of gin and dry vermouth. The reason you stir it with a special spoon is so not to chip the ice. James is ordering a weak martini and being snooty about it."

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 9:36 pm

Message

HogyMaster

Joined: 14 Dec 2011Posts: 918Location: Nar Shaddaa

Dog-Poop_Walker wrote:

If LA had a poor performance, then why did Disney purchase the company? Are bad investments responsible management and good for the share holders?

So you say. But why did they cancel The Clone Wars? That wasn't performing poorly. They could have continued to license it out the same way they say they are going to do with SW games. They axed it because Cartoon Network is a competitor to the Disney networks. And you know what they are going to do when the contracts for Dark Horse and Del Rey are up. With Disney owning Marvel and other publishing houses it makes no sense for them to keep those going and it's doubtful they will try to acquire the rights since they didn't already.

When Disney bought Star Wars people were saying it would be a great fan service and show of faith if they negotiated with Fox to get a new release of the OT. That will never happen.

You see this as Just Business, but one way to do good business is to make the best product available that consumers want. Another is to use Monopolistic bullying to knock out your competition. If Disney had it their way they would get rid of the OT the same way they are trying to get rid of the EU so that in the future all there will be is "Disney's Star Wars"._________________The absurd man thus catches sight of a burning and frigid, transparent and limited universe in which nothing is possible but everything is given, and beyond which all is collapse and nothingness. He can then decide to accept such a universe and draw from it his strength, his refusal to hope, and the unyielding evidence of a life without consolation.

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 10:43 am

Message

CerrineaMaster

Joined: 09 Jun 2009Posts: 1491

I don't know why Disney axed TCW but it wasn't due to competition with Cartoon Network. That contract was up at the end of the current season so TCW could have been easily switched to a Disney channel. Maybe they axed it because they want to put all the focus, assets and energy towards the ST. There's also the argument that the PT era is a bit over-saturated. I just don't know.

As far as the Del Rey license: Hyperion isn't the size of Random House by a long shot. Plus Hyperion publishes general fiction and non-fiction for adults and has no scifi/fantasy division. It could actually cost them to bring the adult books over to their own publisher.

Also several different companies publish Star Wars books, depending on the type of book. For example, Scholastic publishes the young adult fiction, not Del Rey. DK is another publisher -- the TOR encyclopedia is one of their books. So it's not just a matter of moving everything from Del Rey over to Hyperion.

I don't think it's just a simple matter of say when the license is up with Del Rey, Disney will move it to Hyperion.

As far as the license moving to Marvel, I know a lot of people are assuming that will happen, but Marvel owned the license at one point and gave it up before the end of the contract. Dark Horse has performed very well with that license. Disney might still decide they want it back at Marvel, but I don't think that's an assumption everyone should automatically make.

However, even if Disney did kill TCW and will move licenses in the future, that doesn't invalidate that LucasArts was performing poorly and that Disney's decision there wasn't a sound one._________________Roqoo Depot co-founder.

So Star Wars has been licensed out to publisher EA, whom publishes the Battlefield games so it bodes well for Battlefront 3. They also own Bioware so it bodes well for SWTOR and perhaps KOTOR 3.

Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 5:27 pm

Message

Luke92Knight

Joined: 19 May 2011Posts: 367Location: England

Doubt we'll get KOTOR 3, but there's potential for Battlefront 3 on the Battlefield engine for next-gen consoles _________________Hear me now
Words I vow
No f****** regrets
F*** these chains
No damn slave
I will be different!

Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 10:13 pm

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

Perhaps not with KOTOR 3, if Bioware/EA thinks it will compete with SWTOR.

I just realized a negative though. Future Star Wars games are unlikely to be on Steam, but instead be exclusive to Origin. I have both... but I definitely prefer Steam. But since EA is licensing Star Wars, they might put it on Steam anyway. Maybe.

Posted: Tue May 07, 2013 4:53 am

Message

Luke92Knight

Joined: 19 May 2011Posts: 367Location: England

And that's why I will be buying all future games on console unless it's PC only_________________Hear me now
Words I vow
No f****** regrets
F*** these chains
No damn slave
I will be different!

And here's another article with a bit more information: http://www.oxm.co.uk/53502/dice-to-create-star-wars-games-using-battlefield-engine-tech-boss-talks-turbolasers/_________________I am a Star Wars fan. That doesn't mean that I hate or love Jar Jar. That doesn't mean I hate or love Lucas, or agree or disagree 100% with him. That doesn't mean I prefer the PT over the OT, or vice versa. That doesn't mean I hate the EU, or even love all of it (or even read all of it). These are not prerequisites. Being a man is not a prerequisite. Being a geek is not a prerequisite. The only prerequisite is that I love something about Star Wars. I am a Star Wars fan.

I can't wait for always online, on disc DLC, DLC endings, and pay for play multiplayer. There's nothing better than buying a game and then finding out that you have to pay extra if you actually want to play it._________________The absurd man thus catches sight of a burning and frigid, transparent and limited universe in which nothing is possible but everything is given, and beyond which all is collapse and nothingness. He can then decide to accept such a universe and draw from it his strength, his refusal to hope, and the unyielding evidence of a life without consolation.

I can't wait for always online, on disc DLC, DLC endings, and pay for play multiplayer. There's nothing better than buying a game and then finding out that you have to pay extra if you actually want to play it.

Bioshock Infinite understood. Every once in awhile we still get games that release in the 'old ways', where DLC is an afterthought and doesn't turn out to be required for the game._________________Perfection is a lifelong pursuit requiring sacrifice. The only way to get it quicker is to sacrifice the most.

Posted: Wed May 08, 2013 7:47 am

Message

Jedi JoeMaster

Joined: 11 Jun 2009Posts: 1562

Not too excited about this. EA tends to put profit before quality in their games. Disney at least treats their properties well, EA not so much..._________________